Guddi Singh, MB BChir, MPH, John Owens, MA, PhD, and Alan Cribb, PhD
Co-creation initiatives in health care have potential to support health equity but require a redistribution of power and a common vision in order to succeed.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(11):1132-1138. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.11.msoc1-1711.
Iris G. Insogna, MD, MBE and Elizabeth S. Ginsburg, MD
Although the World Health Organization defines infertility as a disease, insurance coverage gaps generate disparities in access to care and treatment, especially for tubal factor infertility and oncofertility.
AMA J Ethics. 2018;20(12):E1152-1159. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2018.1152.
Carrie A. Bohnert, MPA, Aaron W. Calhoun, MD, and Olivia F. Mittel, MD, MS
Research and training are needed so that physicians are able to identify human trafficking victims and refer them to appropriate trauma-informed treatment.
AMA J Ethics. 2017;19(1):35-42. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2017.19.1.ecas4-1701.
Wendy E. Parmet, JD and Claudia E. Haupt, PhD, JSD
Clinicians using governing authority to make public health policy are ethically obliged to draw upon scientific and clinical information that accords professional standards.
AMA J Ethics. 2023;25(3):E194-199. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2023.194.
S. Michelle Ogunwole, MD, PhD and Francheska D. Starks, PhD
Testimonial injustice is an expression of racism that uses identity to undermine individuals’ credibility as authoritative “knowers” of their own bodies, selves, and experiences.
AMA J Ethics. 2024;26(1):E72-83. doi:
10.1001/amajethics.2024.72.
Preventing bad outcomes for teens and their offspring was the impetus behind confidential care for reproductive health. Requiring parental involvement created an obstacle to the provision of necessary care.
The default principle—that someone is free to do what he or she desires in the absence of a compelling reason why he or she should not—may make it possible to resolve ethical disputes without recourse to a particular moral framework.
AMA J Ethics. 2015;17(4):289-296. doi:
10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.4.spec1-1504.